Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description discloses that it doesn't consume the one-time download of the final result and supports Range playback in REST, which are behavioral traits beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It also notes the tool is free. These add context beyond annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three concise sentences with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded, and the additional behaviors are stated efficiently.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only retrieval tool with two parameters, the description covers purpose, quota behavior, and a feature (Range playback). It doesn't describe return format or error conditions, but given the simplicity, it's adequately complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning to job_id or candidate_id beyond what the schema already provides. It doesn't explain parameter relationships or formats beyond schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it retrieves candidate WAV from quality history, with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from final result by noting it doesn't consume the one-time download, differentiating it from tts_jobs_result.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for quality evaluation by contrasting with the final result and noting it doesn't consume the download quota. However, it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools or provide when/when-not conditions, so it's clear but not explicit.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.